ArticleCureus2022
Does Timing of Completion Radical Cholecystectomy Determine the Survival Outcome in Incidental Carcinoma Gallbladder: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant treatment for incidental gallbladder cancer: A systematic review.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2025Review
- Incidental Gallbladder Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Incidental discovery of gallbladder cancer (GBC) on postoperative histopathology or intra-operative suspicion is becoming increasingly frequent since laparoscopic cholecystectomy became the standard of care for gallstone disease. Incidental GBC (IGBC) portends a better survival than primarily detected GBC. Various factors affect the outcome of re-resection with the timing of re-intervention an important determinant of survival. Methods All patients of IGBC who underwent curative resection from January 2009 to December 2018 were considered for analysis. Details of demographic profile, index surgery, and operative findings on re-resection, histopathology and follow-up were retrieved from the prospectively maintained database. Patients were evaluated in three groups based on the interval between index cholecystectomy and re-resection: Early (<4 weeks), Intermediate (4-12 weeks) and Late (>12 weeks), using appropriate statistical tests. Results Ninety-one patients were admitted with IGBC during the study period of which 48 underwent re-resection with curative intent. The median age of presentation was 55 years (31-77 years). The median duration of follow-up was 40.6 months (Range: 1.2-130.6 months). Overall and disease-free survival among the above-mentioned three groups was the best in the early group (104 and 102 months) as compared to the intermediate (84 and 83 months) and late groups (75 and 73 months), though the difference failed to achieve statistical significance (p=0.588 and 0.581). On univariate analysis, factors associated with poor outcome were node metastasis, need for common bile duct (CBD) excision and high-grade tumor. However, on multivariate analysis, poor differentiation was the only independent factor affecting survival. Conclusion Early surgery, preferably within four weeks, possibly entails better survival in incidentally detected GBC. The grade of a tumor, however, is the most important determinant of survival in IGBC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.